Brainjuicer Unilever Innovations Oktoberfest 2008

Billed as an innovation conference to attract the innovation fraternity – this conference was the brainchild of John Kearon Chief Juicer of the research agency Brainjuicer. He had the idea of gathering together the most interesting speakers he had heard in the last 12 months. BV Pradeep of Unilever offered their St James Road office in Kingston as a venue and so the event came together – a safe place for those specialising in innovation to set aside day for stimulating argument and discussion with some networking thrown in.

  After John’s introduction, BV Pradeep, insighter in-chief and member of Unilever’s global leadership team, led the conference through two case studies: the Pro-age case study for Dove and the story of the launch of the anti-dandruff shampoo Clear – the first an example of challenging the conventions of the skincare market and targeting a whole new audience. And the second a classic story of launching a fighting brand to challenge Head and Shoulders’ overwhelming dominance and in at least one market to take market leadership within a year. Useful examples because as emerged from the debate afterwards successful product launches are as much about successful execution – launching your plane down the runway and making sure that all 4 engines are firing – as it requires reframing a marketplace with a piece of successful insighting. The reason why Head and Shoulders was vulnerable was in part because the high price point made it a profitable sector to attack – perceived efficacy was linked to price! There was also an interesting discussion about whether the Pro-age strategy marked a broadening of the natural beauty idea from body shape to post menopausal skin or the next articulation of it.

  And then something completely different.  Michael Spencer of Sound Strategies followed with a series of quiz questions about the use of sound as part of brand identity. Because our vocabulary in explaining sounds is so limited we find it difficult to talk about differences in types of music. What he seemed to demonstrate was that the usage of sound was so misplaced it explained exactly why so few companies put sound on their websites – it’s a very difficult thing to get right. But this is a missed opportunity.  People become so much engaged with sound that with a proper strategy sounds could become a powerful tool for establishing clear brand identities and creating better recall and involvement.  Michael cited British Airways as a great example where the Lakme theme has been reused and adapted for different contexts so that it is always recognisable but doesn’t have to be the same score or specific recording. We finished this session with a 4 part jungle chant with full audience partcipation!

  Mark Earls concluded the morning with an introduction to his herd concept: humans as the  herd species that think they’re an I species. Much of the material he presented referenced academics and evolutionary psychologists who would be unfamiliar to most marketing people. New to me at least was the typology of social influence (decisions or copying) crossed with directed or random decisions – work which has come out of Mark’s collaboration with Alex Bentley of Durham university. What emerges from this is that marketing involves thinking entirely differently about how to engage an audience –the challenge is to make it easy for people to imitate what others do rather than focus on messaging and getting messaging thought about and remembered.  Mark finished by saying that what we had to do was to light lots of fires without any certainly about which one would be the most successful.  From the questions afterwards it was clear there was some resistance – someone wanted to know if this meant lighting the same fire lots of times! And some were less convinced that the theory of high status influencers was as broken as Mark claims.

  The Q and A following Mark’s session stretched for the best part of half an hour. Which made a sizeable dent in the time John Kearon had for his presentation.  What followed was an act of great generosity – John cut his session in half to get the conference back on time. He spoke in praise of failure and outlined Thomas Edison’s 5 principles: align processes with goals, cultivate charismatic optimism, seek knowledge relentlessly, experiment persistently, pursue rigorous objectivity. And he asked a question which became a persistent theme through the afternoon. Why is it that with the solitary exception of conjoint analysis in the 1950s quantitative research has failed to produce any significant new technique for two generations. Agencies grow by eating each other not by doing anything different.  One of John’s last slides was a composite of the movers and shakers he respects in research at present – in effect his significant competitors who he went through one by one identifying how these pioneers were starting to break into new territory.

 When he finished the first question came from one of his financial backers. Why are you so open about your best ideas – aren’t you damaging the business? His answer was as follows – no one is likely to steal your ideas until they are successful – in which case you are in the strongest position to exploit them based on the experience you have accumulated. Put it out there to give others a chance to contribute. And as the category prospers everyone benefits (and so will you).  An interesting take in a room full of innovators!

  Jaroslav Cir, consumer and market insight director for Rexona took up the baton to attack the myth of market research certainty.  He pointed out that the availability of the GMI panel made it easy for any of his own people to put out quick online surveys to check hypotheses. Unilever can move faster because it doesn’t have to wait for its suppliers. He tipped Facebook as the future of for market research. Sorrell should have bought Facebook not TNS! To break new ground in insighting it was better to trust individuals. At which point he namechecked the semiotician Greg Rowland who got more mentions in the next half hour than Joe the plumber in the last presidential debate!  At the end of the session there was an interesting exchange between Pradeep and Jaroslav. Pradeep’s point was that to get Unilever’s management behind an initiative you still need the classic evidential tools to provide an element of certainty. But they agreed that without the leaps which individuals could provide Unilever can’t grow – there is a genuine problem that the large research agencies aren’t delivering the great leaps forward.

  The last speaker of the afternoon was Andrew Gaule of the H-I network. What he showed was how diverse are the means for developing new products – there are literally dozens of models for developing revenue streams on the borders or even right outside the large organisations. His core schematic illustrated that modest changes in business focus could result in dramatic business growth through innovation. One of his examples was Philips – how do you grow a business where DVD players are now cheaper than DVDs? He showed a prototype which was designed externally and which Philips had manufactured – Philips is willing to turn inside out – assembling what outside designers create. When the questions started Andrew was a lot more equivocal. With so many different models to choose from he refused to be drawn on his preference for particular forms of spin off. Suits you sir  seemed to be the mantra! It depends on what you need.

And so the day came to a conclusion – as we headed for the drinks table we were each presented with a brain shaped stress cushion. So what did the day deliver?  Brainjuicer was among friends so had no need to hustle its own products.  Unilever’s hosting ensured that the content of the day stayed focussed on client issues and not on supplier products. What I enjoyed about the day was the achievement of a genuinely safe space for exploring ideas. Confidentiality can only get you so far. I got the sense that a lot of conversations were going on – conversations which would be difficult to hold in other more conventional industry environments. So a good fest – hope they do it again.